Wikiposts
Search
Fragrant Harbour A forum for the large number of pilots (expats and locals) based with the various airlines in Hong Kong. Air Traffic Controllers are also warmly welcomed into the forum.

CX 777's

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 16th Oct 2006, 04:09
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Question CX 777's

Why are the CX 777’s on the ground with no engines? Are the Rolls having the same problem as the GE’s? One can still take-off with the GE’s. Go Airbus!
Is it affecting their ETOPS?
Mr. Bloggs is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2006, 05:06
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I must say... it's has not been a good look for some time now! Taxing down to 07R and seeing a CX 777 with no engines.... you'd think that they could move it somewhere else, out of the view of the pax.
Night Watch is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2006, 08:21
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Established.
Age: 53
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It certainly is affecting their ETOPS. Last time I checked you require 2 engines for ETOPS.
The Messiah is offline  
Old 16th Oct 2006, 08:47
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 1313 Mockingbird Lane
Posts: 362
Likes: 0
Received 5 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Night Watch
.... you'd think that they could move it somewhere else, out of the view of the pax.
You mean like next to the other 777 with the hot end missing in the "T" bay, so they can see it when they come off 07L/25R
LapSap is offline  
Old 17th Oct 2006, 12:28
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Outa Africa
Age: 54
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mr. Bloggs,
You can't POSSIBLY be comparing the Boeing 777 to an Airbus....surely????!!!!
NP.
NdekePilot is offline  
Old 18th Oct 2006, 14:27
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Established.
Age: 53
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
CX 777's are 180 min ETOPS providing they have both engines bolted on.
The Messiah is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2006, 05:27
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Something to do with the turbine blades deciding to leave the engine. I believe SQ are also suffering from this latest RR failure...CX's fascination with the RR engines must surely end soon.
BlueEng is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2006, 11:19
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Long ago and far away ......
Posts: 1,401
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
BA's RR Trent 895 777s don't seem to be having any trouble! Are CX's a different version?
MrBernoulli is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2006, 12:42
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: HKG
Posts: 1,410
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I understand RR said wait until they are due a check before changing the blades but as CX had had 2 failures they did theirs straight away and got all the spares they could. SQ have got some a/c AOG as have Emirates. I think American and BA have yet to start checking theirs.
BusyB is offline  
Old 23rd Oct 2006, 13:31
  #10 (permalink)  
swh

Eidolon
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Some hole
Posts: 2,179
Received 24 Likes on 13 Posts
Originally Posted by BlueEng
CX's fascination with the RR engines must surely end soon.
EY just lost their ETOPS approval after 2 GE90-115 HPT failures, something for SQ and CX to look forward to.
swh is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2006, 05:11
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Established.
Age: 53
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why would they lose their ETOPS when the very definiition of ETOPS is to allow for engine failures etc.

Doesn't sound right to me.
The Messiah is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2006, 09:34
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: .
Posts: 2,997
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool

Because the T in ETOPS is for Twin not single.
spannersatcx is offline  
Old 24th Oct 2006, 11:24
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The Messiah.

Are you for real! Go to the Wannabe's forum, it's obviously where you belong.
Striker58 is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2006, 12:31
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Established.
Age: 53
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
swh
When you say EY do you mean Emirates which are EK or Etihad which are EY?

Striker58
Are you a second officer by any chance?

Last edited by The Messiah; 26th Oct 2006 at 09:21.
The Messiah is offline  
Old 25th Oct 2006, 17:30
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Asia
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BusyB
I understand RR said wait until they are due a check before changing the blades but as CX had had 2 failures they did theirs straight away and got all the spares they could. SQ have got some a/c AOG as have Emirates. I think American and BA have yet to start checking theirs.
CX had 1 and SQ 2 failures of LP blades according to tech. sources. Rest of info is same as I have it.
Beta Light is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2006, 00:44
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Smogsville
Posts: 1,424
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The EK failure recently is being discussed here, http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=248980 it was a failure of some sort on an A330 T700, CX had a fan fail on a A330 T700 back in Sept.

Here are a couple of pics from the EK thread, some BIG holes

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/4796/image000va2.jpg
http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/3654/image002fn7.jpg
SMOC is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2006, 06:17
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: honkers
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Messiah
swh
Striker58
Are you a second officer by any chance?
Strange, may I ask what if he is?....I hope your not having a dig at the SOs now!!!!
SkyCruiser is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2006, 09:43
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Established.
Age: 53
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just curious if he is and how much ETOPS experience he would have as being one.

As far as I can find out EK have not lost their ETOPS approval at all. I would be very surprised if they had, just for 2 engine failures which were quite possibly not even ETOPS flights (but of course possibly they were I don't know). If it is a GE90-115 problem then all operators of them would lose ETOPS until the problem is fixed don't you think? Just to harp on it a bit more whatever ETOPS rule you are approved to (eg 180 min) lets not forget that is based on flying to the nearest suitable after the failure at single engine Vmo/Mmo not twin engine. I think a few of you may be a bit confused by the term because it is effectively Extended Single Engine OPS when you have to rely on it for real.

I know it is a rumour network but you still have to be hesitant to believe anything you read on here.
The Messiah is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2006, 10:50
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: .
Posts: 2,997
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool

I think a few of you may be a bit confused by the term because it is effectively Extended Single Engine OPS when you have to rely on it for real.
Not really, ETOPS is NOT just about the ability to fly on one engine, you can have 2 perfectly serviceable engines and not be able to fly an ETOPS sector, there are a multitude of other factors/systems that allow you to fly ETOPS, as the OP is for operations. I think it is you who is confused.
spannersatcx is offline  
Old 26th Oct 2006, 11:18
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Established.
Age: 53
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not confused here at all, the original point was regarding engine failures which is what I was questioning, not whether there is an E in the MEL prior to dispatch.
The Messiah is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.